Customers within the world of software development require prompt value and safe, properly tested software products. In response to this challenge, many development teams have moved to an “agile” code delivery model in which a full scope of a project is broken down into several “code drops.” The definition of each drop is either determined by the customer based on business value, or is defined by developers who consider mainly criteria that makes it simple for them to deliver code in an expedited manner.
For relatively small projects, a single code provider can define the code drops as meaningful packages. On the other hand, for relatively larger, more complex projects, multiple code providers are typically required to deliver a solution. When each of such providers tries to define their own code drops, the software delivered to an acceptance testing organization does not necessarily exhibit any business value, since the delivered drops are not synchronized between providers. Further, as a result of such lack of synchronization, a first code provider may produce first code in accordance with a first timetable (by T=1), while a second code provider may produce second code in accordance with a second timetable (by T=2, after T=1). Thus, by virtue of the fact that both the first code and the second code must be delivered before testing can begin, final production code cannot be delivered to the customer until the completion of later-delivered second code.
There is thus a need for addressing these and/or other issues associated with the prior art.